linux-kernel - Re: 0xB16B00B5? Really? (was Re: Move hyperv out of the drivers/staging/ directory)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <60467.1342912870@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Date:	Sat, 21 Jul 2012 19:21:10 -0400
From:	valdis.kletnieks@...edu
To:	richard -rw- weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>
Cc:	KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>,
	Bjørn Mork <bjorn@...k.no>,
	"Greg KH (gregkh@...uxfoundation.org)" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
	"devel@...uxdriverproject.org" <devel@...uxdriverproject.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"virtualization@...ts.osdl.org" <virtualization@...ts.osdl.org>
Subject: Re: 0xB16B00B5? Really? (was Re: Move hyperv out of the drivers/staging/ directory)

On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 17:03:59 +0200, richard -rw- weinberger said:
> On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 4:00 PM, KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com> wrote:
> > Thank you for your interest in fixing this problem. When we decide to change this
> > ID, we will conform to the MSFT guidelines on constructing this guest ID.
> >
>
> I'm wondering why it hasn't been conform to the MSFT guidelines from
> the very beginning on?

It's a lot easier to sneak something cute into code when it isn't maintained in
git repositories and mailing lists readable by everybody and their pet llama.

I'll admit to not doing a *lot* of extensive review, but I try to at least read
Kconfig patches (mostly out of self-defense so when I do a 'make oldconfig' I
get presented with something useful ;)  - and it's amazing how often I spot
issues in stuff that's presumably already had several pair of eyeballs look at
it already.

Probably what happened - some programmer had a 60 hour week, wrote the code on
a Friday and had a sudden attack of the sillies, and it went through a code
review meeting, but they had to cover 800 lines of code in a one-hour meeting
so nobody looked *too* close...

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped